Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
-- taliban commander is reported dead in pakistan. the united states killed the commander in pakistan and his deputy and eight others. washington did not confirm the strike but officials say he has a great deal of blood on his hand and his death would be a significant blow to the taliban stronghold in the area. >> he was just the latest terrorist leader to die in the drone strike but such targeted killings are not without controversy particularly regarding the assassination of al qaeda leader al-awlaki in yemen in 2011. that is because he was actually a u.s. citizen born in new mexico. but there is a government memo outlining the legal justification for killing an american without a trial. however, a judge ruled the memo can stay secret and she said there is no legal way to force the justice department to make it public. now, a former assistant u.s. attorney in the eastern district of new york. before we get to the secret memo , dispense of the question that many may have: isn't it true that during war the killing of an enemy combatant regardless whether he is an american citizen or not is in
, and pakistan. every other country in the world we are under the kind of contracting rules i think interfere with our capacity to get the best deal particularly when it comes to security we should in the countries where the threats unfortunately are going to always be with us. should we look to extend that to mali or somalia? >> there was an article i think in one of the newspapers today that went into detail. for more than two decades federal law required the state department to select the cheapest rather than the best contractor to provide local guard services at the embassies abroad. there is that olding you get what you pay for and this lowest-price provision started off in 1990 but it has stayed with us and i would respectfully request this committee take a hard look at it. you cannot do a total lifting of it for everyone look at the high threat posts where obviously we did it for iraq, afghanistan, and pakistan and the countries you made would fall into that category. >> among the various islamic extremist groups operating in africa today, in your view which poses the greatest threat,
of the civil war are beginning and happening with those type of troops. >> shepard: pakistan, china and iran will play major roles over there you said. his goal now is just to get as much money as he can? >> well, you know, i was talking to the general who runs an area in the north there and he said why are the americans letting the communists in. hamid karzai is signing deals to protect afghanistan. he wants us to protect them and let other people grab all the wealth that is still to be tapped. >> shepard: there has never been any real indication the afghan forces were able to do much of anything. fewer than 5% of people with read or write. >> i was told that the afghan forces trained by the russians were better are trained on the afghan forces they have now. they are very good but they don't have air support and we have to provide all of the major intel and observation and air lift and logistics that they need to fight the taliban. >> shepard: to what end? >> i really don't know. hamid karzai is doubling down on the taliban and that means the south will love it but the north will not be ve
. before it came from an internet cafe in pakistan. the u.s. has gotten good tracking down cellphone transmissions. this is the concern. >> shep: usually when somebody takes somebody, they want something in return. there hasn't been anything like that. >> you could say that is perhaps additional indicator that this is a government or intelligence agency within a government that is behind it. because, various times you want to be able to play out cards. you don't know what the relationship with the united states is going to be like down the road, who they are going to scoop up. maybe to trade somebody or you may just want to keep a bur in the side of united states. some of this trade and u.s. is doing things to try to find him. iranians may be examining what the u.s. is doing to see how it works in a case like this. >> shep: he was a private investigator at the time. maybe somebody wants to get information from them? >> that hasn't been fielded as a reason. remember all of this is murky. presumption that iranian agents, he was taken in kish but that is not a reason he had some kind of
back al-qaeda and forced it out of afghanistan to the no man's land on the border with pakistan. if you are talking about nation building in afghanistan and creating some kind of stable legitimate law abiding democracy there we haven't succeeded to that degree. that is one of the reasons i think that the president if not rushing for the exits today was talking about a pretty fast walk to the exits because he realizes i think that the bigger goals he may have had for afghanistan at the beginning are impossible and that the only goal we can count on at this point is making sure that our enemies don't get a foot hold there again. >> shepard: to transfer security to a capable afghan security force. that is the goal. but we have a number of guests who come from from time to time including robert young peloton who has been over there recently and says it is just not working and i can't find the expert who can figure out long-term how it might work unless we just stick around there and help police them which of course is an option. >> chris: i'm not sure in the end and one of the things that t
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)